Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:45:49.460Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - Corrective Feedback and the Development of Second Language Grammar

from Part V - Corrective Feedback and Language Skills

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2021

By
Helen Basturkmen  and
Mengxia Fu
Edited by
Hossein Nassaji  and
Eva Kartchava
Hossein Nassaji
Affiliation:
University of Victoria, British Columbia
Eva Kartchava
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ottawa
Get access

Summary

This chapter reviews themes in research into the effectiveness of oral corrective feedback, typically provided by language teachers, on L2 grammatical development. It synthesizes research evidence for the effects of oral corrective feedback on learners’ development of grammar and the relative efficacy of different corrective feedback strategies, such as output-prompting and input-providing. Further themes concern the effectiveness of oral corrective feedback on salient and non-salient grammatical features and in relation to learners’ varying levels of knowledge of the targeted features. Even though most research in this area concerns the development of accuracy, the chapter includes a review of the considerably smaller body of literature that offers insights into the potential value of oral corrective feedback on the development of fluency. The chapter reviews the different kinds of oral and written tests that have been used in research to gauge grammar learning, some of which teachers may wish to consider adopting to assess their learners. Based on the cumulative evidence from research, we make suggestions for classroom teachers, although we recognize that teachers’ decisions about the provision of oral corrective feedback are often based on multiple factors, including affective factors and teaching objectives.

Keywords

Oral feedbackL2 grammarfeedback strategiesaccuracyfluencysaliencyknowledge levelstest types
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching , pp. 367 - 386
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ammar, A. (2008). Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammar, A. & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all?: Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543–574. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basturkmen, H. (2017). Explicit versus implicit grammar knowledge. In Liontas, J. (ed.), TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (Vol. V, pp. 2738–2743). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley .Google Scholar
Bygate, M. (1994). Adjusting the focus: Teacher roles in task-based learning of grammar. In M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. Williams, (eds.), Grammar and the Language Teacher (pp. 237–259). London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27(1), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00290.x.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 94–112). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050096.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 339–360). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching research and language pedagogy. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fu, M. (2019). The timing effects of corrective feedback and their associations with working memory, declarative memory and procedural memory. PhD dissertation in progress. University of Auckland, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J. & DeKeyser, R. (2001). Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English: A Meta‐analysis of multiple determinants. Language learning, 51(1), 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00147.Google Scholar
Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 445–474. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000149.Google Scholar
Guchte, M., Braaksma, M., Rijlaarsdam, G. & Bimmel, P. (2015). Learning new grammatical structures in task-based language learning: The effects of recasts and prompts. Modern Language Journal, 99(2), 246–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12211.Google Scholar
Harmer, J. (1983). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Educational Limited.Google Scholar
Hawkes, L. & Nassaji, H. (2016). The role of extensive recasts in error detection and correction by adult ESL students. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 19–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.1.2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2014). The interface between feedback type, L2 proficiency, and the nature of the linguistic target. Language Teaching Research, 18(3), 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813510384.Google Scholar
Li, S., Zhu, Y. & Ellis, R. (2016). The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 276–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12315.Google Scholar
Loewen, S. (2012). The role of feedback. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 24–40). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Loewen, S. & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361–376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399–432. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104263021.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59(2), 453–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00512.x.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060128.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: a series of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Park, H. & Tagarelli, K. (2016). Errors, corrective feedback and repair. In Hall, H. (ed.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 499–512). Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01211.x.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59(2), 411–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00511.x.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2017). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12387.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1988). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 52–79.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. (2014). Delayed versus immediate corrective feedback on orally produced passive errors in English. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Startvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive grammar of the English language. London; New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Ranta, L. & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In DeKeyser, R. (ed.), Practice in a second language: perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In Norris, J. & Ortega, L. (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sato, M. & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–626. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000356.Google Scholar
Scrivener, J. (2011). Learning teaching: The essential guide to English language teaching (3rd ed.). Oxford: Macmillan Educational.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 301–322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E. (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Thornbury, S. (2018). Learning grammar. In Richards, J. & Burns, A. (eds.), The Cambridge guide to learning a second language (pp. 183–192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, Y. & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 235–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990519.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). Relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback: The role of working memory capacity and language analytic ability. Applied Linguistics, 34(3), 344–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams044.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y. & Yuksel, D. (2011). Effects of communication mode and salience on recasts: A first exposure study. Language Teaching Research, 15(4), 457–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811412873.Google Scholar
Zhao, Y. (2015). The effects of explicit and implicit recasts on the acquisition of two grammatical structures and the mediating role of working memory. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Auckland, New Zealand.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×